SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Angaluki Muaka v Beryl Awinja Sakwa [2017] KEHC 10026 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 10026 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
10026
Citation
[2017] KEHC 10026 (KLR)
Decided
5 October 2017
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureAppeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at NairobiCoramF. TUIYOTT
Holding

The Court finds that Beryl was in very early default of the Agreement and the only amount due to Angaluki is Kshs.600,000 for the months of June and July 2013 and late payment fee of 5%. Judgment is entered in favor of Angaluki for Kshs.2,687,797 plus interest and refund of Kshs.1,977,797.

Facts

Angaluki Muaka and Beryl Awinja Sakwa entered into a Joint Business Venture Agreement on February 14, 2013, to set up a Colon Cleansing and Beauty Shop. Angaluki paid Beryl a total sum of Kshs.1,927,797 as startup capital. Beryl failed to pay agreed monthly instalments of Kshs.300,000 from June 2013.

Issues

  1. Whether the parties entered into an Agreement dated 14th February 2013 and if so, what were the agreed terms and conditions thereof.
  2. Whether Beryl is liable to refund the startup capital and pay dividends and late payment fees as claimed by Angaluki.

Reasoning

The Court found that the payments were not conditional on the success of the business and that Beryl was in default from August 2013. The Court also ruled that the late fee is a one-off penalty.

Outcome

Judgment in favor of Angaluki for Kshs.2,687,797 plus interest and refund of Kshs.1,977,797.

Orders

  • Judgment in favor of Angaluki for Kshs.2,687,797 plus interest and refund of Kshs.1,977,797.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to Angaluki.

Remedies

  • Refund of Kshs.1,977,797.
  • Kshs.630,000 for the months of June and July 2013 and late payment fee of 5%.
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case